Local News

Parents fail in bid to have daughter sterilised

The 25 year old is intellectually disabled

The parents of a 25-year-old intellectually disabled woman have failed in their bid to have her sterilised to prevent unwanted pregnancies.

The young woman, who is known as ZEH, has a job and is an accomplished athlete. However, she struggles with basic tasks and lives at home with her parents.

Her parents believe there is a risk she will be taken advantage of and say that she is unable to consent to sexual activity.

“ZEH’s character and personality has evolved into a person who gravitates to anyone who has a smile or shows interest in her,” her parents told the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

“She is always a follower even in her peer group and she will always do what others say.

“Whilst that trait is to be applauded unfortunately in this ever-changing world she can be exposed to potentially serious risks by being taken advantage of in a sexual manner.”

ZEH’s parents told the court about an incident a few years ago where ZEH was touched sexually by another young person at a social activity. “[The incident] significantly highlighted our daughter’s inability to process what is right or wrong when dealing with relationships and sexual activity,” they said.

ZEH is currently taking the pill but her parents say this isn’t ideal as she needs to be reminded to take it every day. She has tried other contraception, such as the hormonal IUD, but she had a bad reaction to the hormones.

For ZEH’s parents, the solution is obvious. They want her to have a tubal laparoscopy, a permanent contraception that blocks the Fallopian tubes. However the court has ruled that a sterilisation simply to prevent a pregnancy is an extreme denial of a person’s human rights.

“Sterilisation of a young woman with intellectual disability requires, as the High Court has made clear, justification of the most compelling kind,” said VCAT Deputy President Genevieve Nihill.

She continues: “ZEH’s circumstances, on the evidence before me, are such that there is no therapeutic basis for the procedure, and there are less invasive and less permanent contraceptive options available to her.

“I acknowledge and respect the loving intentions of the applicants, and recognise that they are strong advocates for her rights and her best interests.

“In the current circumstances, however, I am not satisfied that there is compelling justification for the special procedure, nor that it is the least restrictive option, and I do not consent to it.”

Related stories